Effects of exam-room computing on clinician-patient communication: A longitudinal qualitative study

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Volumn 20, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 677-682

  Frankel, Richard ^a,b,h   Altschuler, Andrea ^c   George, Sheba ^d,e   Kinsman, James ^c   Jimison, Holly ^f   Robertson, Nan R ^g   Hsu, John ^c  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e DREW UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g Robertson Group   (United States)

^h NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication; Electronic medical records; Exam room computers; Integrated delivery system

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION; NURSE PRACTITIONER; OUTPATIENT; PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; VERBAL COMMUNICATION;

EID: 23744437893     PISSN: 08848734     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0163.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Powell J. NHS national programme for information technology: changes must involve clinicians and show the value to patient care. BMJ. 2004;328:1200.
2. Bush G.W. Executive Order: Incentives for the Use of Health Information Technology and Establishing the Position of the National Health Information Technology Coordinator. 2004.
3. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review [see comment]. JAMA. 1998;280:1339-46
4. Engel G. How Much Longer Must Medicine's Science be Bounded by a Seventeenth Century World View? The Task of Medicine. Dialogue at Wickenburg. Menlo Park: The Henry Kaiser Family Foundation; 1988: 113-36.
5. Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, Dull VT, Frankel RM. Physician-patient communication. The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA. 1997;277:553-9.
6. Schmittdiel J, Grumbach K, Selby JV, Quesenberry CP Jr. Effect of physician and patient gender concordance on patient satisfaction and preventive care practices. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:761-9.
7. Kaplan SH, Gandek B, Greenfield S, Rogers W, Ware JE. Patient and visit characteristics related to physicians participatory decision-making style. Results from the medical outcomes study. Med Care. 1995;33: 1176-87.
8. Cooper-Patrick L, Gallo JJ, Gonzales JJ, et al. Race, gender, and partnership in the patient-physician relationship. JAMA. 1999;282:583-9.
9. Levinson W, Gorawara-Bhat R, Lamb J. A study of patient clues and physician responses in primary care and surgical settings. JAMA. 2000;284:1021-7.
10. Suchman AL, Matthews DA. What makes the patient-doctor relationship therapeutic? Exploring the connexional dimension of medical care. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108:125-30.
11. Stewart M, Brown JB, Boon H, Galajda J, Meredith L, Sangster M. Evidence on patient-doctor communication. Cancer Prev Control. 1999; 3:25-30.
12. Glass RM. The patient-physician relationship. JAMA focuses on the center of medicine. JAMA. 1996;275:147-8.
13. Inui TS, Carter WB. Problems and prospects for health services research on provider-patient communication. Med Care. 1985;23:521-38.
14. Frankel RM, Stein T, Krupat E. The Four Habits Approach to Effective Clinical Communication. Oakland, CA: Kaiser Permanente; 2003.
15. Charmaz K. Grounded theory. In Smith JA, R. Harré, Van Langenhove L, eds. Rethinking Methods in Psychology. London: Sage; 1995, 27-49.
16. Devers KJ. How will we know "good" qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999;34(5, Part 2):1153-88.
17. Sheflen A. Communicational Structure: Analysis of a Psychotherapy Transaction. Bloomington, Ind: Indiana University Press; 1971.
18. Cohen-Cole S.A. The Medical Interview: The Three Function Approach. St. Louis: Mosby-Yearbook; 1991:21-7.
19. Frankel RM, Quill T. The Biopsychosocial Approach: Past, Present, Future. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press; 2003.
20. Keller VF, Carroll JG. A new model for physician-patient communication. Patient Educ Couns. 1994;23:131-40.
21. Tresolini CPF. Health professions education and relationship-centered care. Report of the Pew-Fetzer task force on advancing psychosocial health education: 1994.
22. Stewart MB, JB. Patient-Centered Medicine: Transforming the Clinical Method. Thousands Oak, Calif: Sage: 1995.
23. Wasserman RC, Inui TS, Barriatua RD, Carter WB, Lippincott P. Pediatric clinicians' support for parents makes a difference: an outcome-based analysis of clinician-parent interaction. Pediatrics. 1984;74: 1047-53.
24. Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Ware JE Jr. Expanding patient involvement in care. Effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 1985;102:520-8.
25. Lester GW, Smith SG. Listening and talking to patients? A remedy for malpractice suits. West J Med. 1993;158:268-72.
26. DiMatteo MR, Taranta A, Friedman HS, Prince LM. Predicting patient satisfaction from physicians' nonverbal communication skills. Med Care. 1980;18:376-87.
27. unknown. Eye contact and patient satisfaction, unknown: 2004.
28. Milmoe S, Rosenthal R, Blane HT, Chafetz ME, Wolf I. The doctor's voice: postdictor of successful referral of alcoholic patients. J Abnorm Psychol. 1967;72:78-84.